Some things that are puzzling me

I couldn't find a thread which quite fitted, so I'm starting a new one. Bear in mind that I haven't seen HLV yet, and have only watched TSoT through for the first time a couple of days ago, so I'm still mulling it over.

I found it difficult to believe in the characters planning the wedding. All three of them! None of them struck me as the type to be particularly interested in wedding stationery, etc. I suppose we're supposed to think that Mary, as the bride, is the most interested, but even she didn't strike me as somebody who'd care that much. And the napkins? The caterers would do the napkins, not the best man. Maybe it was to show Sherlock going off the rails slightly in his efforts to please John? Of course, Sherlock had to see the wedding stationery to be able to solve the crime, so there was that. How did John go from craving danger and excitement to wanting to plan all the tiny details of a wedding? I suppose he got used to boredom even at 221B, when Sherlock would spend hours thinking or doing something unfathomable, and he's also used to helping out when needed. But still.

Then there was Sherlock being surprised at being John's best friend. It didn't make any sense. Sherlock has called John his friend in the very first episode (ASiP). Just in the last episode, John has said that Sherlock is the best man he's ever known. I know Sherlock can sometimes miss the obvious, but I didn't find it believable that he would be so dumbfounded at being John's best friend. It was a sweet little scene otherwise. And I recognise that Sherlock is telling a story, and it's possible that it didn't actually happen like that.

Sherlock seemed confused when the guests were moved by his speech. He'd spent ages writing it, researched it, drafted in LeStrade, deliberately made it "sentimental" - why was he suprised to get the intended reaction? It didn't ring true. (I suppose all of these things could show that Sherlock is failing in some way, not functioning as usual ... and maybe that will be explained in HLV). Just in general, Sherlock does understand people's motivations and feelings very well, or he wouldn't be able to solve cases the way he does - what is going wrong here?

He's normally a show-off, but here he seems to put himself down quite a lot, for instance by talking about cases he couldn't solve. I know he's trying to take a back seat to John and Mary. But then he doesn't! He takes centre stage with the wedding speech, and seems to be the only person making a speech (although maybe we missed John's speech).

In TRF, Sherlock created a public persona for a reason, and I wondered if that's what he's doing here? There are so many times that Sherlock has been one step ahead of the game and kept it from us (the audience).I don't know. I find this episode confusing. A lot of it is about his relationship with John, but there are changes in other ways too. He channels Mycroft in a way that we haven't seen him do before - I did like that (that he needs to tune into the Mycroftian part of his mind).

The murder method didn't convince me either, which was a shame as I liked the idea. Somebody convince me that it would work!

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

Then there was Sherlock being surprised at being John's best friend. It didn't make any sense. Sherlock has called John his friend in the very first episode (ASiP). Just in the last episode, John has said that Sherlock is the best man he's ever known. I know Sherlock can sometimes miss the obvious, but I didn't find it believable that he would be so dumbfounded at being John's best friend. It was a sweet little scene otherwise. And I recognise that Sherlock is telling a story, and it's possible that it didn't actually happen like that.

Sherlock told the things a bit differently as they actually happened, as we can see in the pictures shown to us simultaneously to what he's saying. So things actually happened like we could see them.And I am not surprised at all. Telling someone how much you like/love/adore him and showing him (by letting him be the Best Man) are two different things for me. I fully understand that Sherlock was confused - as he also explains during his speech. He never thought he would ever be a man's BEST FRIEND.I know people I really adore for e.g. for their intelligence. But it doesn't mean they are my best friend.Sherlock also knows that a lot of people are quite impressed by his intelligence (clients), but is not used to be or have a real friend. A BEST friend.

Addition: When he called John his friend in ASiP it was for showing off. He didn't know it and I think he also didn't really believe it.

Sherlock seemed confused when the guests were moved by his speech. He'd spent ages writing it, researched it, drafted in LeStrade, deliberately made it "sentimental" - why was he suprised to get the intended reaction? It didn't ring true. (I suppose all of these things could show that Sherlock is failing in some way, not functioning as usual ... and maybe that will be explained in HLV). Just in general, Sherlock does understand people's motivations and feelings very well, or he wouldn't be able to solve cases the way he does - what is going wrong here?

Nothing is going wrong imo. He knows that people cry when they care for somebody or someone died. And he uses this knowledge it for solving crimes. But he also very often needed John as guidance. "Sherlock! Not now!" "Sentiment?" "Sentiment."So he was telling the audience quite nice things about John - and Mary - and is obviously confused why everyone's crying. So he does what he always did: Asking John what's wrong, Relying on him. As he always does when it comes to "this kind of stuff."It shows us very impressive that he might have developed, that he shows more feels, but still is unsure in this terrain.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

He's normally a show-off, but here he seems to put himself down quite a lot, for instance by talking about cases he couldn't solve. I know he's trying to take a back seat to John and Mary. But then he doesn't! He takes centre stage with the wedding speech, and seems to be the only person making a speech (although maybe we missed John's speech).

We don't know if John made a speech before. Or if he would have made one after Sherlock's. However, the case came into the way. The speech was fine and he intends to end it when he holds up the glass. Then Mycroft tells him (in his mind palace) that he has control and has to keep it. That's the point when the speech get's out of line as he tries to keep control and solve the case without the guests noticing.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The murder didn't really convince me, either. But I take things easy here and tell myself: Well, it's fiction and it maybe could have worked, so fine with me.But I believe I would notice if someone punctures me, no matter how slim the "tool" may be.

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

Good point about ASIP. I need to watch that again. But I still can't buy that Sherlock would think they didn't have that relationship yet. There are all sorts of clues along the way - not that clues are needed. And what was the point of that scene at the end of the last episode if Sherlock still thought John thought of him as ... a colleague? Did he really think John had a closer relationship with MIke or Greg than him? I can't see it.

Yes, John probably made a speech that wasn't included, and the episode is structured around Sherlock's speech, so it probably feels more central to the wedding than it actually is. But he never does quite get to the funny stories about John - a lot of it is about Sherlock and the two of them together, their relationship, their cases and very little about John himself as a separate person. (John asking him to be best man, for instance - Sherlock focuses more on his own reaction). Which is fine - I think that fitted with the character and the story.

Sherlock being surprised at the audiences reaction: what I mean is that he planned and rehearsed for that reaction . The speech is meant to be moving. So it feels more of a comedy thing - here's Sherlock not understanding humans again. When in fact I think he usually does understand, very well (and knows how to manipulate them). Look at how he susses out Sholto, for instance.

I agree about the murder - I think that even with the belt, they would have felt the whatever-it-was. It had to be something sturdy enough to push through clothing and flesh and also big/dangerous enough to do damage (sever an artery rather than pierce it). How could the murdered be sure of hitting a major artery. And how would the belt act as a tourniquet around the abdomen? It might work on a limb.

It also felt that it relied on chance a bit: Sholto hiring single, female employees, the wedding happening at all, the photographer managing to get hired for that wedding - which was partly planned by Sherlock!

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

Liberty wrote:

I couldn't find a thread which quite fitted, so I'm starting a new one. Bear in mind that I haven't seen HLV yet, and have only watched TSoT through for the first time a couple of days ago, so I'm still mulling it over.

I found it difficult to believe in the characters planning the wedding. All three of them! None of them struck me as the type to be particularly interested in wedding stationary, etc. I suppose we're supposed to think that Mary, as the bride, is the most interested, but even she didn't strike me as somebody who'd care that much. And the napkins? The caterers would do the napkins, not the best man. Maybe it was to show Sherlock going off the rails slightly in his efforts to please John? Of course, Sherlock had to see the wedding stationary to be able to solve the crime, so there was that. How did John go from craving danger and excitement to wanting to plan all the tiny details of a wedding? I suppose he got used to boredom even at 221B, when Sherlock would spend hours thinking or doing something unfathomable, and he's also used to helping out when needed. But still.

Then there was Sherlock being surprised at being John's best friend. It didn't make any sense. Sherlock has called John his friend in the very first episode (ASiP). Just in the last episode, John has said that Sherlock is the best man he's ever known. I know Sherlock can sometimes miss the obvious, but I didn't find it believable that he would be so dumbfounded at being John's best friend. It was a sweet little scene otherwise. And I recognise that Sherlock is telling a story, and it's possible that it didn't actually happen like that.

Sherlock seemed confused when the guests were moved by his speech. He'd spent ages writing it, researched it, drafted in LeStrade, deliberately made it "sentimental" - why was he suprised to get the intended reaction? It didn't ring true. (I suppose all of these things could show that Sherlock is failing in some way, not functioning as usual ... and maybe that will be explained in HLV). Just in general, Sherlock does understand people's motivations and feelings very well, or he wouldn't be able to solve cases the way he does - what is going wrong here?

He's normally a show-off, but here he seems to put himself down quite a lot, for instance by talking about cases he couldn't solve. I know he's trying to take a back seat to John and Mary. But then he doesn't! He takes centre stage with the wedding speech, and seems to be the only person making a speech (although maybe we missed John's speech).

In TRF, Sherlock created a public persona for a reason, and I wondered if that's what he's doing here? There are so many times that Sherlock has been one step ahead of the game and kept it from us (the audience).I don't know. I find this episode confusing. A lot of it is about his relationship with John, but there are changes in other ways too. He channels Mycroft in a way that we haven't seen him do before - I did like that (that he needs to tune into the Mycroftian part of his mind).

The murder method didn't convince me either, which was a shame as I liked the idea. Somebody convince me that it would work!

This post could have been written by me - and even after watching HLV and pondering about it for over half a year now I´m no less confused than I was. There is so much in this episode that makes no sense to me or doesn´t quite ring true.. although for the majority it seems to be a favourite, the things you mention keep puzzling me..

Another example: Sherlock studies a book about how to write a best man speech. He wants to give it his best shot, he asks Lestrade vor advice. Even for someone who values rational thought and intellect over the subtleties of social graces it should be pretty clear by then that you maybe better don´t express your own negative opinion on the social construct of marriage on that special occasion? Or did the book advise to "make it all about yourself, your worldview and your love for the groom"? So many questions. I find it hard to believe that an highly intelligent man who wants to please his best friend (with whom he was reconciled very recently and their relationship is still quite shaky) would act as he did. But obviously that´s just me..

The murder method wouldn´t work, sorry for not even trying to convince ;P. A blade broad enough to cause severe bleeding couldn´t be inserted through clothes, skin and muscles without the victim noticing anything. The pressure you´d need alone.. it doesn´t just slide in like that. And all the nerves on its way.. if the blade is so sharp as to not cause pain while slicing it I bet every surgeon would be delighted to buy the patent. And if the belt was enough to keep the wound from bleeding for several hours, then the victim could have compressed it quite easily too while calling for help. And don´t tell me you can lose so much blood you faint without even noticing it, I´m an expert on severe bloodloss, and.. no. You can´t.

I know this ep is one of the favourites for most people, and I really really want to like it too, but.. well. You can´t have everyting. I enjoy the brilliant aesthetics of it and try not to overthink the rest..

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

Zatoichi wrote:

Another example: Sherlock studies a book about how to write a best man speech. He wants to give it his best shot, he asks Lestrade vor advice. Even for someone who values rational thought and intellect over the subtleties of social graces it should be pretty clear by then that you maybe better don´t express your own negative opinion on the social construct of marriage on that special occasion? Or did the book advise to "make it all about yourself, your worldview and your love for the groom"? So many questions. I find it hard to believe that an highly intelligent man who wants to please his best friend (with whom he was reconciled very recently and their relationship is still quite shaky) would act as he did. But obviously that´s just me..

What it comes down to here for me are emotions. Sherlock's emotions - and we all know how awkward he tends to behave when emotions are involved. Or people, come to think of it. And there are lots of people at the wedding.Yes, he did prepare the speech, he read stuff up in a book, he consulted Lestrade (although we don't know anything about the contents of that book or about the advice Lestrade gave him). But then there he was, in front of all those people, when the only person in the room he really, really cared about was John. I'm not even sure he prepared all those things he said about marriage and the family idiot asf... I'd rather believe that he got carried away, that he lost track there for a moment. Maybe because even Sherlock Holmes (or maybe especially Sherlock Holmes) can't properly prepare for such an occasion. In theory maybe, but on the day...? At that point he might already have deduced Mary's pregnancy - could have irritated him, because a child could mean that he would spend even less time with John. And maybe his fear of losing John, of things changing between them is the reason why he talked about himself and John so much in that speech. Because that's what really went on in his head. Which would mean that he got carried away by his emotions - but those emotions feel kind of wrong to us, because we would never behave like that. But Sherlock would.

I'm not sure I'm making any sense here. It's just that I always felt that this whole episode really is about Sherlock and John, about their friendship, and that in that context the wedding speech makes complete sense to me.

Last edited by SolarSystem (August 12, 2014 11:12 am)

___________________________________________________"Am I the current King of England?"

"I see no shame in having an unhealthy obsession with something." - David Tennant"We did observe." - David Tennant in "Richard II"

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

I love the speech, for me it is one of the finest pieces of writing in the series. Why? Because it is so very Sherlock. He was never one for social graces and telling funny stories to entertain a whole room of people. He has been away for two years and is still not sure that John has forgiven him. He has to do so many things that are foreign to him and which he despises and for which he usually has not patience. He is so desperate that he calls his brother because he does not want to be the only outsider here. For me this is a man barely holding himself together (remember his look to the chair and the words "into battle") and yet trying to do everything to make John happy.

For me the saddest thing about the speech is how little Sherlock thinks of himself. Here we see that for all his brilliance and showing off he deeply insecure where emotions are concerned. He does not like himself and therefore assumes that other people do not like him either. (Btw, for me this is mirroring his "inner John" scene in TEH when he hears John saying all those things he has said before but with a negative undertone. This is how Sherlock sees himself).

------------------------------"To fake the death of one sibling may be regarded as a misfortune; to fake the death of both looks like carelessness." Oscar Wilde about Mycroft Holmes

"It is what it is says love." (Erich Fried)

“Enjoy the journey of life and not just the endgame. I’m also a great believer in treating others as you would like to be treated.” (Benedict Cumberbatch)

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

SusiGo wrote:

For me this is a man barely holding himself together (remember his look to the chair and the words "into battle") and yet trying to do everything to make John happy.

Very important point, if you ask me. He is not doing all this because he likes it or because he's good at it - but because he's doing it for John. John told him that Sherlock is his best friend. Because Sherlock thinks so little of himself, as Susi mentioned, this comes as a surprise to him. And now that he has a best friend and can actually believe that someone would consider him to be his best friend - this said best friend marries. Leaves him for real. That wedding day must have been hell for Sherlock.

___________________________________________________"Am I the current King of England?"

"I see no shame in having an unhealthy obsession with something." - David Tennant"We did observe." - David Tennant in "Richard II"

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

In the whole episode, Sherlock is not his calculating self but quite off track. Before he goes "into battle" (in his battle dress ) he even tries to talk down the significance of the event in front of himself and Mrs Hudson: "what 'big day'?". He knows that the wedding will mark "the end of an era", though John had told him that they will continue to do "stuff". And the "big question" scene which in my opinion is the real proposal he takes the place of the one who is unexpectedly being proposed to - including confusion, being flattered, surprise and emotion. This is - of course! - over the top for simply being asked to be best man - but Sherlock's reaction to everything that has to do with the wedding - even making napkin folding issues for top-level - indicate that there is more to his best man role than just his best man role. And the writers want us to be aware of this.

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

Yes. It must have been hell for two reasons - because he had to to all those things and all that mingling he usually hates and on top John is leaving him. The situation is different but it all reminded me of Rick Blaine's words in "Casablanca": "A guy standing on a station platform in the rain with a comical look in his face because his insides have been kicked out."

------------------------------"To fake the death of one sibling may be regarded as a misfortune; to fake the death of both looks like carelessness." Oscar Wilde about Mycroft Holmes

"It is what it is says love." (Erich Fried)

“Enjoy the journey of life and not just the endgame. I’m also a great believer in treating others as you would like to be treated.” (Benedict Cumberbatch)

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

The whole thing about him having low self-esteem and thinking people don't like him doesn't fit with what he sees. He is surrounded by people who clearly care about him, even at the wedding. Even if you leave out John, he's got LeStrade dropping the case of his career just because Sherlock might be in danger, he's just found out that Mrs Hudson brings him tea every morning, and Mary appearing to value him, asking his advice as well as seeing through him.

In fact, he's less alone at that wedding than many people would be. There are people who don't have such good friends, and are single/divorced/widowed/etc. At least Sherlock chooses not to indulge. I felt that a little at the end, that he's chosen that path and there is a little bit of regret. But it's not like everybody else is perfectly happy - Molly with the not-Sherlock boyfriend, Mrs Hudson with the bigamist, etc.

I agree that he's worried about a change in the relationship with John. Mrs Hudson doesn't help, and I agree that he probably knew about the pregnancy before the speech (when Mary talks about the wine). But he can't think John doesn't care about him. He was able to hear what John said at his grave when John didn't know he was listening. And then John says it to his face at the end of TEH. And there's the best man "proposal".

Zatoichi, yes I enjoy the aesthetics too, and there are some things I like about it (the courtroom scenes, solving a puzzle rather than chasing about it getting in danger), and some things that I don't mind - I'm happy for Sherlock to have slowed down intellectually if this is going to mean something - even if it's just that he's right about how "sentiment" affects him. But some parts just don't seem to add up and don't seem to be in character.

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

Liberty wrote:

I couldn't find a thread which quite fitted, so I'm starting a new one. Bear in mind that I haven't seen HLV yet, and have only watched TSoT through for the first time a couple of days ago, so I'm still mulling it over.

I found it difficult to believe in the characters planning the wedding. All three of them! None of them struck me as the type to be particularly interested in wedding stationary, etc. I suppose we're supposed to think that Mary, as the bride, is the most interested, but even she didn't strike me as somebody who'd care that much. And the napkins? The caterers would do the napkins, not the best man. Maybe it was to show Sherlock going off the rails slightly in his efforts to please John? Of course, Sherlock had to see the wedding stationary to be able to solve the crime, so there was that. How did John go from craving danger and excitement to wanting to plan all the tiny details of a wedding? I suppose he got used to boredom even at 221B, when Sherlock would spend hours thinking or doing something unfathomable, and he's also used to helping out when needed. But still.

Then there was Sherlock being surprised at being John's best friend. It didn't make any sense. Sherlock has called John his friend in the very first episode (ASiP). Just in the last episode, John has said that Sherlock is the best man he's ever known. I know Sherlock can sometimes miss the obvious, but I didn't find it believable that he would be so dumbfounded at being John's best friend. It was a sweet little scene otherwise. And I recognise that Sherlock is telling a story, and it's possible that it didn't actually happen like that.

Sherlock seemed confused when the guests were moved by his speech. He'd spent ages writing it, researched it, drafted in LeStrade, deliberately made it "sentimental" - why was he suprised to get the intended reaction? It didn't ring true. (I suppose all of these things could show that Sherlock is failing in some way, not functioning as usual ... and maybe that will be explained in HLV). Just in general, Sherlock does understand people's motivations and feelings very well, or he wouldn't be able to solve cases the way he does - what is going wrong here?

He's normally a show-off, but here he seems to put himself down quite a lot, for instance by talking about cases he couldn't solve. I know he's trying to take a back seat to John and Mary. But then he doesn't! He takes centre stage with the wedding speech, and seems to be the only person making a speech (although maybe we missed John's speech).

In TRF, Sherlock created a public persona for a reason, and I wondered if that's what he's doing here? There are so many times that Sherlock has been one step ahead of the game and kept it from us (the audience).I don't know. I find this episode confusing. A lot of it is about his relationship with John, but there are changes in other ways too. He channels Mycroft in a way that we haven't seen him do before - I did like that (that he needs to tune into the Mycroftian part of his mind).

The murder method didn't convince me either, which was a shame as I liked the idea. Somebody convince me that it would work!

Those were exactly my thoughts when I saw the episode for the first time.

The most puzzling thing for me was Sherlock belittling himself in front of some unknown strangers (even calling himself an asshole and denoting his adventures as ridiculous). Now, that was a sharp contrast with how his personality was depicted in the rest of the series. A vain man, proud at his abilities and achievements the way he was before would never do such thing! Plus, why would he do it in the first place? He never cared for the opinions of strangers, why would he start now? And he certainly didn´t do it for John, since what benefit would John have from his friend kicking himself in this manner? It all makes zero sense to me.

Also, John and Mary having such posh, pompous wedding with hundreds of wedding guests, the huge wedding feast, disco and all that stuff seemed very unusual to me. They were both introduced as quite humble, unasuming people with simple tastes so this "royal style wedding" didn´t pass to them at all. I guess some little, quiet wedding with only a few friends attending would be more to their liking. And Mary, with her dangerous past, probably wouldn´t be willing to be seen by too many strangers either - what if someone would accidentally recognise her? Shit happens.

The episode was otherwise very funny, loaded with tons of witty references to AC Doyle´s work, but those two things always bugged me.

But I presume that it´s not wise to overanalyse this episode too much. Moftiss were just being sentimental and wanted to toy with the characters a bit, so it´s pointless to search for logic in TSOT rather than simply enjoying it for what it is.

-----------------------------------

I cannot live without brainwork. What else is there to live for? Stand at the window there. Was there ever such a dreary, dismal, unprofitable world? See how the yellow fog swirls down the street and drifts across the dun-coloured houses. What could be more hopelessly prosaic and material? What is the use of having powers, Doctor, when one has no field upon which to exert them?

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

nakahara wrote:

The most puzzling thing for me was Sherlock belittling himself in front of some unknown strangers (even calling himself an asshole and denoting his adventures as ridiculous). Now, that was a sharp contrast with how his personality was depicted in the rest of the series. A vain man, proud at his abilities and achievements the way he was before would never do such thing! Plus, why would he do it in the first place? He never cared for the opinions of strangers, why would he start now? And he certainly didn´t do it for John, since what benefit would John have from his friend kicking himself in this manner? It all makes zero sense to me.

Actually, it makes total sense to me, because it means that John has saved Sherlock from being an unpleasant asshole. That's his way of telling John what John means to him and how important John really is for Sherlock. John put up with all of Sherlock's shit, he lived with it and apparently he likes Sherlock for what and who he really is. Sherlock's way of acknowlwdging this might be a little awkward, but in my opinion that's just Sherlock.

___________________________________________________"Am I the current King of England?"

"I see no shame in having an unhealthy obsession with something." - David Tennant"We did observe." - David Tennant in "Richard II"

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

SolarSystem wrote:

nakahara wrote:

The most puzzling thing for me was Sherlock belittling himself in front of some unknown strangers (even calling himself an asshole and denoting his adventures as ridiculous). Now, that was a sharp contrast with how his personality was depicted in the rest of the series. A vain man, proud at his abilities and achievements the way he was before would never do such thing! Plus, why would he do it in the first place? He never cared for the opinions of strangers, why would he start now? And he certainly didn´t do it for John, since what benefit would John have from his friend kicking himself in this manner? It all makes zero sense to me.

Actually, it makes total sense to me, because it means that John has saved Sherlock from being an unpleasant asshole. That's his way of telling John what John means to him and how important John really is for Sherlock. John put up with all of Sherlock's shit, he lived with it and apparently he likes Sherlock for what and who he really is. Sherlock's way of acknowlwdging this might be a little awkward, but in my opinion that's just Sherlock.

Yes, that´s possible. Would be quite nice actually.

I had also a theory that maybe it was Sherlock´s rounabout way of pointing at John´s importance. By belittling himself and describing his flaws he simultaneously emphasized good points of John´s character.

-----------------------------------

I cannot live without brainwork. What else is there to live for? Stand at the window there. Was there ever such a dreary, dismal, unprofitable world? See how the yellow fog swirls down the street and drifts across the dun-coloured houses. What could be more hopelessly prosaic and material? What is the use of having powers, Doctor, when one has no field upon which to exert them?

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

Liberty wrote:

In fact, he's less alone at that wedding than many people would be. There are people who don't have such good friends, and are single/divorced/widowed/etc.

Yes. But still (also in reality) there are people who are loved by many people and still don't see it themselves. I think that's the point of Sherlock here. He is "so not used to it" that he probably cannot imagine.

nakahara wrote:

The most puzzling thing for me was Sherlock belittling himself in front of some unknown strangers (even calling himself an asshole and denoting his adventures as ridiculous). Now, that was a sharp contrast with how his personality was depicted in the rest of the series. A vain man, proud at his abilities and achievements the way he was before would never do such thing! Plus, why would he do it in the first place? He never cared for the opinions of strangers, why would he start now? And he certainly didn´t do it for John, since what benefit would John have from his friend kicking himself in this manner? It all makes zero sense to me.

SolarSystem wrote:

I'm not even sure he prepared all those things he said about marriage and the family idiot asf... I'd rather believe that he got carried away, that he lost track there for a moment.

I don't think he lost track and I do think that the "bad" beginning of the speech was indeed prepared. Because before he changes in tone he kind of tells the guests that he wanted to show them what an asshole he is and therefore he has no explanation why he earns Johns deep friendship.

I found the episode funny the first time. But while watching it again and again it changes from funny to sad.

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

Liberty wrote:

Sherlock being surprised at the audiences reaction: what I mean is that he planned and rehearsed for that reaction . The speech is meant to be moving. So it feels more of a comedy thing - here's Sherlock not understanding humans again. When in fact I think he usually does understand, very well (and knows how to manipulate them). Look at how he susses out Sholto, for instance.

Yes, Sholto. Sholto "is like him", so that's easy.For the others: Again - it was planned and written as a nice speech. (I have no idea what comes from him, what's out of the book and if Lestrade actually helped him.) Crying is a thing for loss, caring, pain. But not out of happiness or because of being moved. Not for Sherlock. Another lack of understanding "ordinary people". That's how I understand that scene.

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

Mattlocked wrote:

I don't think he lost track and I do think that the "bad" beginning of the speech was indeed prepared. Because before he changes in tone he kind of tells the guests that he wanted to show them what an asshole he is and therefore he has no explanation why he earns Johns deep friendship.

That´s possible, but why do you think it´s so important to him to stress how underserving he is? Still solely directed at John, to show how aware he is of his own shortcomings and how sorry about everything he has done to him? And how grateful for his friendship and how much he doesn´t take him for granted and values him?.. To get that message across, even if it means belittling himself, no matter what people will think of him?....Excuse me while I go sob in a corner.

Mattlocked wrote:

Crying is a thing for loss, caring, pain. But not out of happiness or because of being moved. Not for Sherlock. Another lack of understanding "ordinary people". That's how I understand that scene.

I don´t know, our genius living for around 35 years and never ever seeing (or reading about) people crying out of happiness or because of being moved? And saving it as "ordinary people reaction" in his mindpalace? It never occurred to me before but I think Liberty is right here and it´s a comedy thing.. I might have to rewatch TSoT after all..

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

Zatoichi wrote:

I don´t know, our genius living for around 35 years and never ever seeing (or reading about) people crying out of happiness or because of being moved? And saving it as "ordinary people reaction" in his mindpalace?

Yes. This exactly. He has done his job and was a genius all over the long years before he met John. And still he didn't know "how to behave", what's decent and what isn't and so on.He may know a lot meanwhile, but obviously not everything.Or maybe he knows about crying out of being moved, but couldn't imagine his speech having been that moving.

Zatoichi wrote:

I might have to rewatch TSoT after all..

Good idea. One can't watch it often enough. I watched it about.... ten times?...so far and still it's not enough, yet.

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

Well, it just doesn't make sense to me. He's a very good actor and manipulator, he understand what motivates people and how they react (for instance, he shouts at the school house mistress or whatever she was in TRF, to get a quicker answer, then tells people how to deal with her afterwards). There is something wrong if he doesn't know what's happening here. But then there are other examples where Sherlock has been "different" for comedic effect, so that's what I thought might be going on.

I think it's probably right that he's putting himself down to show how much he thinks of John (he says something about the "contrast" earlier, but then twists it round so that he compares less favourably to John). But it is an odd thing to do. Not something John would want. John has already had quite a time of having to almost defend Sherlock's honour during TRF (and after). Sherlock even asks about it mattering to John, what people think of Sherlock. Why on earth would John want Sherlock to publicly belittle himself?

About people not always knowing they are loved and cared for, Mattlocked, it's true, but what I'm saying is that he has proof of it right in front of him, throughout that episode, starting with LeStrade at the beginning.

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

I think we get this again and again - Sherlock not realising how much he matters to John. Just think of TRF - he had no idea why John would be affected when people believed him to be a fake. He has suppressed his feelings for years, has been trained by his brother that having no feelings is an advantage, that only the mind matters. We have no idea what he was subjected to during his absence apart from the torture in Serbia, but I suppose it was not love and warmth. Then he comes back, finds that he cannot return to his old life, that he is alone in the flat, that he has been replaced in a way. Is hit three times by John. I think the six months or so between TEH and TSoT have not been sufficient to cure him of the feeling of emotional inadequacy. He is convinced that John has all the qualities he himself lacks, even if it is not true. Sherlock has never learned to cope with his emotions and to realise that he is capable of feeling, that he has a heart. He starts to do so in TEH but he is by no means at the end of his development.

------------------------------"To fake the death of one sibling may be regarded as a misfortune; to fake the death of both looks like carelessness." Oscar Wilde about Mycroft Holmes

"It is what it is says love." (Erich Fried)

“Enjoy the journey of life and not just the endgame. I’m also a great believer in treating others as you would like to be treated.” (Benedict Cumberbatch)

Re: Some things that are puzzling me

Liberty wrote:

About people not always knowing they are loved and cared for, Mattlocked, it's true, but what I'm saying is that he has proof of it right in front of him, throughout that episode, starting with LeStrade at the beginning.

And it lies in the human nature not to demand a repetition of a declaration of care and love from your beloved ones. Once for a lifetime is enough.